[CCWG-ACCT] [WP1] Updated Memo on Request on Sole Designator

Schaefer, Brett Brett.Schaefer at heritage.org
Mon Nov 9 21:57:03 UTC 2015


Jordan,

If the model that we are discussing is unworkable under a fairly realistic eventuality that seems to be a critical problem.

In my opinion, it requires consideration of: (1) lowering the thresholds to three if there are only four participating entities; (2) shifting minimum thresholds from 4 entities in support to, instead, at least 75 percent of the participating entities in support; or (3) allowing the splitting of votes to surmount existing thresholds.

Best,

Brett

From: Jordan Carter [mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz]
Sent: Monday, November 09, 2015 4:46 PM
To: Schaefer, Brett
Cc: Accountability Cross Community; wp1 at icann.org
Subject: Re: [WP1] Updated Memo on Request on Sole Designator

hi Brett,

Such matrices of decision are not being drafted. If you are able to attend the call in around ~15 hours, I think it would be useful to talk this through. As I've said before, if we are down to four SO/ACs participating, to my mind that's too small an orbit to use the current model.

Jordan

On 10 November 2015 at 08:34, Schaefer, Brett <Brett.Schaefer at heritage.org<mailto:Brett.Schaefer at heritage.org>> wrote:
Jordan,

I appreciate the explanation provided in the memo.

However, I note that the decision matrix remains unchanged in that it requires support from 4 SOs/ACs to exercise powers 1, 2, 5, and 7. The operating assumption is that GNSO, ccNSO, ASO, and ALAC will participate. I believe that they will, but it would be good to get confirmation even with the knowledge that such a statement should not be considered an endorsement of the CCWG proposal.

Also, as we discussed in the previous CCWG WP1 call, there is a possible complication if RSSAC, as expected, decides not to participate and GAC either (1) decides not to participate, (2) decides not to participate immediately, but announces its desire to be allowed participate at some future date, or (3) cannot reach a consensus position.

In that case, unanimous support by the 4 SOs/ACs assumed above to participate would be required in order to exercise powers 1,2, 5, and 7. I don’t think that unanimous support was supposed to be required for exercise of the community powers.

Until we have confirmation of which SOs and ACs (other than SSAC which has explicitly stated its intention not to participate) will be participating in the mechanism, we need to plan out possible scenarios. For this reason, I think we need to provide decision matrices based on varying levels of participation.  Is this being drafted?

Thanks,

Brett

From: wp1-bounces at icann.org<mailto:wp1-bounces at icann.org> [mailto:wp1-bounces at icann.org<mailto:wp1-bounces at icann.org>] On Behalf Of Jordan Carter
Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2015 5:51 PM
To: Accountability Cross Community; wp1 at icann.org<mailto:wp1 at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [WP1] Updated Memo on Request on Sole Designator

... and in PDF
J

On 9 November 2015 at 11:50, Jordan Carter <jordan at internetnz.net.nz<mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>> wrote:
Dear all - for your reading pleasure and for the lists record.

Jordan

________________________________
Brett Schaefer
Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy
The Heritage Foundation
214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
Washington, DC 20002
202-608-6097
heritage.org<http://heritage.org/>

________________________________
Brett Schaefer
Jay Kingham Senior Research Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs
Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy
The Heritage Foundation
214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE
Washington, DC 20002
202-608-6097
heritage.org<http://heritage.org/>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Gregory, Holly <holly.gregory at sidley.com<mailto:holly.gregory at sidley.com>>
Date: 7 November 2015 at 13:48
Subject: Updated Memo on Request on Sole Designator
Dear Co-Chairs, Jordan and Staff,

Attached please find a substantially reorganized and revised memo on how  the Sole Designator would be made operational, to replace the memo that was sent to you last week.  The changes are largely in the nature of clarifications and we have addressed the point requested below as well.  We request that this memo be posted to replace the prior memo.

Please let us know if you have any questions.

Kind regards,
Holly and Rosemary





--
Jordan Carter

Chief Executive
InternetNZ

+64-4-495-2118<tel:%2B64-4-495-2118> (office) | +64-21-442-649<tel:%2B64-21-442-649> (mob)
Email: jordan at internetnz.net.nz<mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
Skype: jordancarter
Web: www.internetnz.nz<http://www.internetnz.nz>

A better world through a better Internet




--
Jordan Carter

Chief Executive
InternetNZ

+64-4-495-2118 (office) | +64-21-442-649 (mob)
Email: jordan at internetnz.net.nz<mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
Skype: jordancarter
Web: www.internetnz.nz<http://www.internetnz.nz>

A better world through a better Internet

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20151109/0e062a81/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list